News from the Residential Property Investor, the bi-monthly magazine for RLA members other artilces from the August / September 1999 issue RPI news archive

Date accommodation left landlord unassured - August / September 1999

A tenant has successfully argued that what his landlord had intended to be an assured shorthold tenancy was in fact an assured tenancy because of a mix-up over the dates.

Mr McCann had originally intended to move into a room in Hounslow in December 1995 and paperwork, including a pre-contractual notice to quit the tenancy under section 20 of the Housing Act 1988, had been drawn up on this basis. In the event McCann moved in in January and the tenancy agreement he had signed was changed to reflect the fact, but not the s20 notice.

When the landlord subsequently served notice for the tenant to leave, he claimed this was ineffective because the s20 notice he had received did not coincide with the dates shown on the tenancy agreement.

When first brought to court, the judge agreed with the landlord that the circumstances surrounding the tenancy should be taken into account and that there could therefore be no doubt about the intended length of tenancy.

But the Court of Appeal disagreed. A reasonable tenant would be in real doubt about which month the tenancy ended and the s20 notice of the assured shorthold tenancy was therefore ineffective, it held.

The decision (Clickex Ltd v McCann) was reported in May.
 

other artilces from the August / September 1999 issue

• Unconvincing Arguments
• In brief
• Empty promises on council tax exemptions
• Date accommodation left landlord unassured
• Squatters win in London tussles
• HMO definition too broad